oMP vs nMP

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by applereviewguy, Mar 8, 2014.

  1. applereviewguy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    #1
    Hi guys,

    Do you think that I should get a 2009 Mac Pro, upgrade the video cards, RAM, processors to X5670's, etc. basically just max it out, or get a base model nMP, or maybe with the D500's.

    I use Xcode a TON daily, along with heavy Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator and pretty heavy Final Cut Pro X and Motion 5.

    Thanks!
    AppleReviewGuy
     
  2. koban4max macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    #2
    u got 8core?
     
  3. Gav Mack macrumors 68020

    Gav Mack

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Location:
    Sagittarius A*
    #3
    Heavy final cut and if you have thunderbolt storage spaghetti get the nMP. FCPX is now coded for it heavily. You would need to go AMD for the cheesegrater ideally.

    If I was in the market to need and afford one I would loath to spend too much so I'd go quad d700 then DIY the CPU and memory myself keeping the old parts in case of an AppleCare call out.
     
  4. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #4
    For your work load, the nMP even in Quad core config will probably outperform a 2009 12-core... for the simple reason that most of those apps can't use 12 cores but they can all benefit from faster clocks. AND as Gav Mack mentioned, you can't build a better computer for FCPX than the nMP.

    On top of all that, I'd never buy a 4-5 year old computer. If I had one, I might consider upgrading it to get more life out of it, but even then...

    I just upgraded from a 2009 oMP to a nMP and this is my experience.
     
  5. echoout macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #5
    I would think FCPX would be the clincher as far as nMP advantages. Maybe consider how you would migrate you current storage (if any) and factor that in to the price.
     
  6. Larry-K macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
  7. applereviewguy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    #7
    Does Xcode use 8-12 cores? Xcode (app development) is how I make most of my money, not Final Cut.
     
  8. CptSky macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    #8
    It will distribute the compilation of the object files through the available cores (maybe not by default, but Make can do it with -jN option).
     
  9. applereviewguy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    #9
    Thanks CptSky!

    What is a good vid card for Xcode? 5870? 2x5770?
     
  10. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #10
    It would seem to me that most of the time during development that you're only recompiling one or a small number of sources -- so that more than a couple of cores would be wasted.

    Do you want to spend thousands of dollars to speed up the less frequent full builds? Or is your code hopelessly "spaghetti" so that changing one line requires a full rebuild?
     
  11. slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #11
    Does Xcode offload anything to the GPU? If not, even a single 5770 would be fine.

    However, you mentioned you do some FCP X. People here are right to point out that GPU is important for that.

    here are some benchmarks showing the difference between the nMP an oMP as well as many video card choices for FCP X. In the oMP, the best setup is a Dual 7970 > Dual GTX680 > Single 7970 > Single 7950 = Single GTX680.

    If you can tolerate the loss in speed, the oMP will save you a lot of money. You may not need thunderbolt (AKA buggy money-pit) storage and the 2009 oMP is cheaper than dirt and can be upgraded to be quite fast. However, for best possible FCPX performance, the D700 in even the base model of nMP will be necessary.

    This is probably a driver issue. The 7970 should be able to outperform the nMP. I would doubt that it'll get fixed though.

    ----------

    What if it saved you thousands of dollars and was very nearly as fast for the majority of your workload? Price/performance of an upgraded 2009 oMP blows the nMP away in a lot of workloads.

    Don't get stuck on the fact that it's old. After all, you bought a new computer using 2-year old video cards :)
     
  12. Gav Mack macrumors 68020

    Gav Mack

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Location:
    Sagittarius A*
    #12
    I got given the heads up yesterday that one, possibly two 2011 dual socket 5,1's should will be coming my way in April. Cheap cos I sold three to the client a few years back for too low a price which are now being replaced by nMP's. Looking very much forward to getting my newer 'old' Mac Pro cos like yourself I need a cheesegrater, not a can for my work :D
     
  13. wildmac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    #13
    No. Why would you buy a 5-year-old computer, and then sink another $1500 into it?

    Especially since you are doing Final Cut X, a nMP would be the wise choice. If you were running a lot of other software that didn't use the new GPUs well, it might be a different story, but the nMP was made for Final Cut X.
     
  14. comatory macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #14
    Buy nMP - just get the basic quad model.. it will be very fine for what you do.
    If you bought 2009 oMP, you would probably go with 8-core or hex-core upgrade... then you would need to add at least thousand bucks to bring in all the good upgrades... It's just hassle, not to mention no guarantee.

    Buy the new quad, get Thunderbolt storage for video editing and you're good to go. Even D300 should provide enough juice for fast video rendering. You can always swap CPU later and adding 3rd party RAM to bring it to 16-24GB should be the next thing to do after buying external storage. You can also add larger SSD (512GB?) later when they become available.
     
  15. Marty62 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Location:
    Berlin formerly London
    #15
    NICE !!

    I really wanted a "dual" 5,1 but I'm v-happy with the single hex 3,33 right now.
    Perhaps in a year or two I will buy a "dual tray" and extra 3,33 when they
    are cheap enough ..... nice upgrade :)

    M.
     
  16. applereviewguy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    #16
    the W3680 can't work in pair with another W3680, only X5680's
     
  17. kic macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    #17
    I realize I'm addressing a minor point in the middle of a larger discussion, but my experience has been that the 7950 is more than twice as fast in some situations than the 680. My BruceX results were roughly 41 seconds versus 1 minute 47 seconds, 7950 and 680, respectively (6 core 2010 Mac Pro with 12 GB of RAM).

    I'll be curious to see if FCPX will be able to use both at the same time when my new power supply shows up. If not, I may opt for dual 280Xs (assuming I can find a pair at non-inflated prices).

    Nice options for an old machine, I think.
     
  18. slughead, Mar 11, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2014

    slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #18
    Why would you pay more than twice as much for a new computer, with 2 year old GPU that you probably wont be able to upgrade? He also said he wont use FCP much.
     
  19. Marty62 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Location:
    Berlin formerly London
    #19
    I wasn't aware of that, oh well I will have to be content with my Hex core
    for longer then !
    It actually works very well and is a noticeable processor "bump" up from my
    3,1 - around 60% better performance.
    GB score of 15,890 against 10,400, real world use seems much better than
    that BTW, due to faster ram / PCIe SSD boot drive etc.
    M.
     
  20. slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #20
    That all makes sense, I was surprised, frankiy, that the GTX680 did so well. Unfortunately, FCPX requires matched video cards to use 2 at the same time, according to Rob Art at Barefeats.com (I asked him specifically). It will ignore the second card if it is not the same kind. I'm sure it defaults to the default card.
     
  21. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #21
    If you want to get the old Mac Pro, just buy one with all the upgrades already.

    Otherwise it's not worth it; just buy the new one.
     
  22. wildmac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    #22
    And again, why would you spend $1500+ on a 5-year-old computer?

    For those that already have 4,1 or 5,1 rigs, upgrading makes sense. But buying one to upgrade, unless you are a tinkerer at heart, makes little sense.

    Building a hackintosh makes a lot more sense if you are trying to save money and have the skill set.
     
  23. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #23
    Quoted for truth.
     
  24. iceppak macrumors newbie

    iceppak

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    #24
    I second this, but if you look at his signature, he already has a hackintosh. With the work that he's doing, a hex or higher would be more beneficial. I would go with nMP Hex.

    oMP vs nMP: Whether you prefer internal expansion (PCIE/USB3/eSATA cards) vs external expansion (TB/USB3).

    I won't look at the nMP's until rev. 1 or later. If I wanted one now, where would I put all my SSD/HDD hards? = More $$ for external enclosures = more cable management = more outlets needed. But hey, Apple --> forward thinking. ie. pushing new standards: firewire, 30-pin, now lighting.

    They seem to be doing well for themselves anyways. :)
     
  25. slughead, Mar 12, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2014

    slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #25
    Why buy an i5? it's just a slower i7!

    Price/performance. You get a mild speed bump in compute power on a 4 core nMP vs 6 core oMP which costs literally twice as much. Do you get what I'm saying? Twice as much is a boatload of money. As far as upgrades, I'd hardly call throwing in a few cards and some RAM "tinkering."

    CPU upgrades are a pain, I'll agree with you there. None of the rest is really "tinkering." It literally takes 5 minutes to upgrade the Old Mac Pro.

    Really, if you're not using a ton of OpenCL (or firePro specific apps in Windows), the nMP's price/performance is abysmal compared to what's out there. Apple tricks people like you into thinking things are a universally good deal because some people are willing to pay for them. Guess what? this guy doesn't want to pay $2000-3000 extra for a machine to run FCPX 40% faster--which he barely uses. That's like saying somebody needs a $100,000 dump truck to commute to work.

    That's not to mention the real price of the nMP. After all, how much do TB HD controllers run in comparison to throwing another drive in the drive bay? I love how people are obsessed with resale value too, because that's such a lame counterargument for the fact that you literally have to sell the thing in order to upgrade the GPU (and CPU, if you want the next socket)

    Also, the video cards are already 2 years old with no promise (and little likelihood) of upgradability. You're buying old technology! Call the President!
     

Share This Page